Research and Training for Management of Arid Lands with Special Reference to Anglophone Africa and the University of Khartoum (UNU, 1980, 48 pages)

Introduction

I. Review of progress on supportive investigations and research projects (and discussions on future priorities)

II. Strategies for development, extension, and management in the drylands

(introductory text...)

Management Strategies for Drylands: An Interim Report D. L. Johnson

Research Priorities and Directions for Arid Lands Development and Management

Strategies for Management and Development in Arid Lands

Role of Rural Industries in the Arid and Semi-arid Areas of the Sudan

New Approaches for Plant Production in Arid Lands A. Richmond

III. Progress in research and training programmes at the institute of environmental studies, university of Khartoum (and recommendations for further development)

IV. An African network for research and training south of the Sahara linked with the university of Khartoum

(introductory text...)

Relevance of the experience of the Sudan in establishing a network for research and training south of the Sahara

V. Curricula for training programmes in arid lands management

Relevance to the UNU Sub-programme of Postgraduate Training in Environmental Science at the University of Khartoum

VI. Collaboration with other United Nations programmes

Appendices

Appendix A. Experience of the Central Arid Zone Research Institute (CAZRI), Jodhpur, India, in the Transfer of Arid Land Technologies, Their Impact and Adoption, and Limiting Constraints

Appendix B. List of Participants

Appendix C. Programme

Other UNU Publications

I. Review of progress on supportive investigations and research projects (and discussions on future priorities)

A review of progress on nine supportive investigations and UNU research
projects formed the focus of this session.

Working Group A discussed three preliminary reports. That by R. Cordes dealt
with Development Schemes and Projects in the Rural-Nomadic Regions of the
United Arab Emirates and the Sultanate of Oman. It was indicated that the
advent of oil revenues had led to the collapse of traditional nomadic and oasis
livelihoods, but the viability of the new economic life seemed equally
insubstantial. Recycling of all revenues into the hands of the local populace
had created the present short-term prosperity, but had merely given an illusion
of economic development. The fact that a social and political crisis had so far
been avoided was due to two main factors: the successful organization of new
settlements, providing an acceptable level of services and amenities, and the
use of oil revenues to purchase the political loyalty of the tribesmen, a
practice that may backfire should the oil resources become depleted. Despite
superficial economic change, it appears that the basic socio-political
structures remain essentially unaltered.

M. M. Khogali's report on Nomadic Sedentarization in the Sudan and
Neighbouring Countries noted current disagreement concerning the
advisability of settling nomads. Whereas politicians accept the notion as
desirable, sociologists and other scholars are less certain. The author claimed
that nomadic pastoralists are not always guilty of degrading the environment,
and that settled peoples frequently create more havoc with their domestic
animals, especially within 30 km of the larger settlements. Cattle constitute an
investment both for nomadic and settled communities, and there is frequent
exchange of services and products between them, as there is of population. The
spontaneous settlement of nomadic groups is increasing, and accordingly there is
a requirement for proper planning before such settlement, to cope with the
increase in the settled population. Nomadic sedentarization is seldom
accompanied by a rapid transition to permanent cultivation, and for this reason
the best approach is first to settle those family members not directly engaged
in herding, whilst the males continue to practice a modified form of the
traditional rotational grazing.

H.-U. Thimm reported on his Socio-economic Assessment of Development Projects
in the Sudan, since published by the United Nations University in its Natural
Resources Programme (NRP) Technical Series. He noted that Sudan's agricultural
future in its arid and semi-arid regions depended in the long run on a careful
mixture of land use, including mechanized rain-fed farming, intensive irrigated
crop production, permanent range-management systems, and flexible nomadic use of
pasture lands. All previous attempts to develop these techniques had brought
both expected and unexpected problems -environmental, economic, and social. The
experiences of a country deeply concerned about desert encroachment, equitable
economic development, and social justice, as well as about its role as a future
"bread-basket" of the Middle East and parts of Africa, might hold the
key for understanding and improving the management of arid lands wherever
similar conditions allowed comparable approaches.

The various forms of project organization in the Sudan showed a definite bias
towards the use of scheme authorities for the implementation of planned
activities, and some of those authorities showed a better performance than
others. His study would try to include observations of project experiences to
assist in answering the question as to which organizational model to choose in
order to reach projected results under given environmental and human
constraints. The degree of involvement of the local people and their motivation
to participate in the project would certainly be a major criterion in answering
this question and in proposing improvements in organization.

Dr. Thimm had assessed eight development projects in the arid and semi-arid
Sudan, involving rain-fed farming, irrigated cropping, and livestock raising,
from the viewpoints of permanence of cultivation, organizational effectiveness,
social acceptance, and economic viability. His assessment had identified four
common problems opposing the successful implementation of developmental projects
in the Sudan. First, cultivation was rarely perceived as permanent, particularly
by entrepreneurial developers; rather, it took the form of short-term
exploitation, and attempts to turn the new cultivators into permanent farmers
had generally had little success. Second, the projects commonly suffered from
organizational shortcomings, such as remoteness and poor infrastructures, which
led to supply bottlenecks, and from poor-quality staff and rapid staff transfers
which hampered continuity of operation. Third, the projects were generally
lacking in social acceptance because the local people had rarely been consulted
and hence commonly failed to "identify" with the objectives of the
scheme. Lastly, the projects had commonly failed to meet the test of economic
feasibility, economic returns having always been overestimated in the projects
examined.

Of these four problems only one, permanence of cultivation, seemed to be a
purely arid land question, whilst the remaining three were also apparent in many
non-arid land projects. On the other hand, experience showed clearly that
solving the problem of permanence in the use of arid land resources did not
remove organizational problems (administrative, infrastructural, logistic, staff
quality, etc.) nor economic issues (low yields, high costs, great risks,
budgetary restrictions, marketing problems, price policy, etc.). These problems
and issues are an inherent part of the aridity of the Sudan, as well as of the
general state of development of the country. The possession of large areas of
arid land certainly makes development more difficult than in regions of more
temperate climate, but areas with higher rainfall have a number of other
problems which can make the development process as difficult as in arid areas.
This can be observed by comparing northern and southern Sudan and their relative
states of development.

The ensuing discussion led to a suggestion that training programmes at the
Institute of Environmental Studies ~ I ES) at the University of Khartoum should
give close attention to the need to improve project planning in the areas of
social acceptance, administrative organization, and economic feasibility.

Deliberations by Working Group B centred on resource-use systems and their
management strategies. In his report on Management Strategies for Non-urban
Drylonds: Preliminary Principles, Douglas L. Johnson pointed out that it is
commonly asserted that there exists sufficient technological wisdom to manage
rural drylands. What is lacking, in this view, is the ability to identify and
overcome obstacles to the application of existing knowledge. It is assumed that,
as soon as these stumbling blocks are properly identified, they can be readily
removed and appropriate practices introduced in their place. Where difficulties
in doing so are encountered, a presumed backward and tradition-bound
constituency is frequently made the scapegoat for lack of interest in adopting
improved techniques and management. The monotonous regularity with which
projects fail to reach their objectives then can be explained by reference to
inability to circumvent existing obstacles, rather than to inadequacies in
technological design or management strategy.

It is likely that this assumption is at least partially false, and that
"modern" technology and management may themselves foster environmental
degradation and retard development. Appropriate in their own socio-economic
contexts, they may be quite unsuited to the situations in which they are being
applied elsewhere. This is almost always certain to be the case when the local
social system, with its means of production and distribution, is viewed as the
repository of egregious error without vestige of redeeming merit. For with such
an attitude, it is difficult to develop plans, projects, and interventions that
articulate well with local reality.

Arguing for the paramount importance of the indigenous resource-use system
and its objectives in the management of drylands does not imply that each
land-use system is unique, or that general principles are undefinable. At least
seven basic principles can be recognized as being broadly applicable.

1. Recognize the broad linkages between the components of
ecosystems. Put another way, it is necessary to identify gainers and losers in
any change affecting drylands. This makes it essential to plan in a
comprehensive regional framework, rather than through a sectoral approach. Only
in this way can one ensure that gains made by irrigation agriculture, for
example, do not take place at the expense of pastoralists, through loss of
seasonal pastures.

2. Base development on the existing productive system, its
technology and practitioners. Management and inputs closely linked to that base
offer the best prospect for substantial impacts on local standards of living.
Efforts to transfer large-scale production systems founded on alien objectives
have seldom achieved their intended results. In the process, substantial
indigenous skill and management expertise have been truncated or lost, where
they might have provided the basis for evolution and development When most
management systems flounder due to inadequately trained personnel, it is
short-sighted to promote development in a way that squanders and ignores
potential local contributors.

3. Cultural-ecological units should form the strategic base of all
management plans. It should be a guiding concept that the group using the
resource should be in charge of its management. The unit being managed should be
large enough to encompass the full range of resources essential to group
survival, taking into account seasonal migration, areas of overlapping interest
with other groups, and so on. Little control can be exerted over resources that
are removed from management by the immediate intended beneficiaries, and the
most rapid and irreversible degradation is to be expected in consequence.

4. Subsistence crops rather than cash crops are the paramount
concern of the bulk of dryland peoples. These subsistence needs must receive
first priority in management programmes. At all times the central focus should
be placed upon people and their livelihood support, rather than for example on
groundnuts or cattle. The latter are at best a means to improved livelihood, not
ends in themselves.

5. Opportunistic, rather than conservative, strategies should be
pursued in dryland management. These would emphasize maximizing production
during higher rainfall periods, while endeavouring to reduce losses to a minimum
during droughts. Gains made during periods of surplus would be stored against
anticipated deficits. Conservative strategies, in contrast, while having the
benefits of limiting ecological disturbance and of sustaining yield despite
environmental conditions, have the overriding defect of producing less for human
sustenance than might otherwise be available.

6. Plan for the inevitable drought during beneficent periods. This
can be done by devising strategies that make available emergency supplies in
types and locations suited to each livelihood system. With pastoralists, for
example, this might involve fodder reserves and emergency wells along major
migration corridors that would enable herds to flee drought afflicted districts.

7. Encourage the most efficient water-use management that is
technically feasible, financially supportable, and socially acceptable. Under
this criterion, for example, overhead-sprinkler irrigation would become a
marginal technique in most drylands. Closed environment agriculture, trickle
irrigation, or dryland-adapted fruit trees would all be preferable technologies
if acceptable from a socio-economic standpoint. Where resources for such
activities exist, industry and tourism represent relatively small
water-consumers compared with agriculture, and should be encouraged.

Sensitivity and flexibility are required in the application of these
principles. But beginning with the objectives and skills of the local
communities, their subsistence needs and livelihood opportunities provide a base
upon which appropriate dryland management plans can most readily be constructed.

Brian Spooner reported on his project on Ecological Approaches to Human-Use
Systems in Arid Lands stating that these approaches are problematical because
they imply oversimplification of social and cultural processes insofar as they
seek to explain them by reference to ecological factors or in terms of
ecological concepts. The basic issues are: Given that ecological conditions
constrain human activity, what generalization can be made about human reactions
(i.e., adaptation) to these constraints? And given that such reactions are
initially individual, what social and cultural generalizations can be made?

Broadly speaking, there have been two types of approach. Firstly, the applied
sciences have developed branches of ecological study that specialize in
particular human production systems. Range ecology serves as a good example of
these, and is typical in that it is concerned not with analysis of the
associated social system but with the production technology in the narrow sense.
Secondly, ecological approaches have been developed in the social sciences,
especially in social anthropology. These approaches have been based on
insufficient ecological understanding and at the same time have been inadequate
sociologically because they have failed to account for socio-cultural and
historical variation.

These approaches have been surveyed in a number of publications (e.g.,
Bennett, 1976). Briefly, once they recovered from their escape from a naive
determinism in the early part of this century, they pursued a cautious
materialism under the term "cultural ecology" which, though not
without significant results at the time, was deficient in its neglect of the
effects of human activity on the natural environment. Great advances were made
in the 1960s with the introduction of an ecosystem approach and of other
biological concepts into cultural study. However, this approach was unable to
comprehend the range of social and cultural factors that we know to be relevant
to the interaction of human activity and natural processes. A degree of balance
was given to the debate by the demonstration that the basic theoretical problems
in human or anthropological ecology were also seen as problems in natural
ecology (Vayda and McCay, 1975). The most important of these were in the
definition of units of study and assumption of equilibrium in one form or
another.

It gradually became clear that an ecological model cannot fully comprehend
social and cultural processes any more than a social or a cultural model can
comprehend ecological processes. This clarification was facilitated by the
formulation in the Man and Biosphere Programme (MAB, 1974) of the position that
ecosystems and human-use systems should not be expected to be co-terminous, and
by the arguments ( in Bennett, 1976) that (1) as society becomes more complex
and more global, social resources take precedence over natural resources in
individual decisions ("the ecological transition"); and that 12)
research in human ecology requires a yardstick, and the only acceptable
yardstick is public policy. His report would spell out some of these problems in
greater detail and argue for a solution through productive give-and-take
dialogue between ecologists and social scientists.

In his report on Ecological Implications of Land Use in Arid Africa, D. F.
Owen referred to the nature of grassland environments and their consequent
management needs. He pointed out that grasslands as biological phenomena are
geologically young. and that the existing herbivore species may well have
assisted in determining their later evolution. One question calling for study is
whether grasslands should be considered as climax communities without
consideration of constant grazing pressure, a question which is particularly
relevant to discussions about desertification. Most grasslands show evidence of
multiple grazing and multiple cropping, and in order to determine whether such
diversity is a necessary condition for their survival there is a need for basic
research into possible co-evolution of the grasslands and their populations of
grazing animals. There is also a need to study grassland management for the
maintenance of balance between annual and perennial pasture components, and with
it the question of whether one is more desirable than the other for the
stability and resilience of the ecosystems. Another aspect of this question is
the maintenance of crop-herd diversity in traditional resource-use systems. Does
this represent a risk-reduction management strategy? Do we know enough about the
range of appropriate mixes? If such diversity represents a successful ecological
and human-survival strategy, why do planners apparently consistently move to
reduce it?

The discussion that followed focused on the centrality of human systems in
arid lands management. Some concern was expressed about the use of different
terms such as human-use system, cultural~ecological system, and
natural-resource-use system, since each seemed to describe the same phenomena.
Did these merely constitute differences of terminology, or did they express
fundamental contrasts in objectives? Some clarification of disciplinary
perspectives was an essential prelude to any general theory of management. Above
all, there was a need to do more than pay lip-service to the need to consider
the human factor in desertification studies. There is often a lack of congruence
between human activities and ecological processes, and the social and cultural
processes should be seen to be very specific in their own right, and as
requiring special attention from the initial stages of development planning.
However, it was admitted that principles establishing the role of social systems
in planning for dryland development still await elaboration.

The scale factor was recognized as being extremely important. Questions as to
whether small-scale or large-scale systems are preferable, and for what
livelihoods, remain undecided, as does the issue of whether management units and
natural ecological units should necessarily be congruent. In addition, there is
a continuing uncertainty about criteria for the evaluation of management of the
drylands. Also unresolved are questions of the human carrying-capacity of
drylands, of the degree of out-migration of population which may be necessary or
desirable to prevent environmental deterioration, of the range of options
available to local groups in the allocation of labour resources, and as to who
should make the decisions on such questions.

Three specific recommendations emerged that were relevant to the association
between the United Nations University and the University of Khartoum, in
addition to the general points raised. First, the terminology employed by the UN
University in its publications and research reports should as far as possible be
standardized with that used by other agencies and programmes. Second, the
research and training programmes fostered by the UN University should pay
special attention to the issue of the appropriate scales at which development
projects, management systems, and traditional resource~users operate, and
particularly to the issue of whether and how far management and ecological units
should coincide. Third, in the development of their research and training
programmes, the IES of the University of Khartoum and the Arid Lands
Sub-programme of the UN University are urged to place particular emphasis on the
central role of the human factor in desertification and in arid lands
management.

Problems and opportunities for urban settlements and the role of desert
research stations as agents for change were the main questions occupying Working
Group C. Three reports were presented. [hat by R. U. Cooke and J. C.. Doornkamp
on Assessment of Geomorphological Problems in Urban Areas of Drylands outlined a
methodology for identifying salinity and floor hazards and other physical
problems in urban areas in arid regions. The basis of the approach is
geomorphological, and analysis at various scales allows for correspondence
between the dimensions of the environmental features identified and the
hierarchy of the planning administration. It was stressed that the city should
not be considered in isolation. Solutions to its problems may create further
problems for adjacent rural areas, and moreover city expansion does not normally
take place into unused and unclaimed land. Finally, attention must be paid to
development over the long term, and to the subsequent maintenance of the urban
environment in good condition.

In his paper on Arid Zone Settlement-the Israeli Experience, A.
Richmond stressed two salient aspects of this experience. First, the use of
natural resources in Israel has been more deliberate, intensive, and in many
respects more successful than in many other arid lands. Second, it has involved
high capital inputs, raising the question as to the conditions under which
technology developed there may be applicable elsewhere.

In his paper on Impact of an Arid Zone Research Station on Local Land-Use
Problems, J. A. Mabbutt presented an assessment of the relationship of the
Central Arid Zone Research Institute (CAZRI) at Jodhpur, India, to land-users in
the neighbouring rural areas. Difficulties encountered here in transferring the
results of the findings of research programmes to their potential users could
provide useful lessons for similar institutions elsewhere. Among the problems
noted was the difficulty of developing contacts between the Institute and the
surrounding rural population. Nevertheless, local people have been involved in
the formulation of land transformation plans by Institute scientists. Five
project villages have been adopted for testing innovations, and the local
farmers visit the Institute fairly regularly. However, the impact of the
Institute on the traditional agrarian economy of Rajasthan has been minimal. The
second problem is that the Institute is funded from and directed by the central
government, whereas the application of its findings must be effected by
extension services within the provincial administration. Another difficulty
arises from the fact that the sights of scientists in this and other such
centres are inclined to be set on targets defined by the international
scientific community, rather than by local perspectives. Can people trained as
scientists be expected to act successfully as propagandists within the local
population? For the successful transmission of research results local innovators
have to be identified, because they appear to be the most effective means of
diffusion.

The main recommendation arising from Working Group C was that the IES might
consider initiating, as part of its programmes, training for the investigation
of hazards in urban environments using the methods employed by Cooke and
Doornkamp.

The Plenary Session began with W. Mecklein reading a paper on The Crisis
of Saharan Oases or "Challenge to Research." He described many
challenging and serious problems of desertification and environmental
degradation in Saharan oases, including salinization, sand-dune encroachment,
diminution of water supplies, depopulation, and other social changes. The author
stressed the need for further research on the monitoring of aquifers, control of
salinization, and improvement of drainage, and for improved long-range planning
of oasis settlements.

The discussions that followed focused on the need for more basic data on
oasis environments. The Kharga Oasis in the New Valley in Egypt and oases in
Libya, Tunisia, and Algeria were suggested as worthwhile research sites. The
need to link such research with training in land management was emphasized,
possibly at the I ES. It was stressed by several speakers that local conditions
commonly vary over time, and that it was necessary to carry out research on a
long-term basis. It was noted that soils in oases are frequently rich, giving
great potential for successful agricultural development if other constraints can
be removed. This potential for raising the incomes of the inhabitants of oases
was seen as a justification for encouraging skilled elements in the local
population to remain. Since the density of settlement in an oasis often
approaches that in an urban area, the investigatory methods employed by Cooke
and his colleagues may also have applications for the planned development of
oases.

The attention of the UN University and of the IES was drawn to the
desirability of identifying oasis settings to which UNU Fellows might be sent
and from which they could be drawn, and to the possibility of collaboration with
the Man and Biosphere Programme (MAB) in establishing a pilot research to
investigate problems of socio-economic change in oasis environments.

References

Bennett, J. W. 1976. The Ecological Transition: Cultural Anthropology and
Human Adaptation. Pergamon Press, New York. MAB. 1974. Task Force
on the Contribution of the Social Sciences to the MAB Programme. Final
Report. UN ESCO-Programme on Man and the Biosphere (MAB), Paris.